Paper detail

A Comprehensive Analysis of Swift/XRT Data: IV. Single Power-Law Decaying Lightcurves vs. Canonical Lightcurves and Implications for a Unified Origin of X-rays

By analyzing the Swift/XRT lightcurves detected before 2009 July, we find 19 cases that monotonously decay as a single power law (SPL) with an index of 1 ~ 1.7 from tens (or hundreds) to ~ 10^5 seconds post the GRB trigger, apparently different from the canonical lightcurves characterized by a shallow-to-normal decay transition. No statistical difference is found in their prompt gamma-rays, and the X-ray properties of the two samples are also similar, although the SPL sample tend to have a slightly lower NH value of the host galaxies and larger energy release compared with the canonical sample. The SPL XRT lightcurves in the burst frame gradually merge into a conflux.The normal decay segment for the canonical sample has the same feature. Similar to the normal decay segment, the SPL lightcurves satisfy the closure relations of external shock models. If the X-rays are the afterglow of the GRB fireball, our results indicate that the shallow decay would be due to energy injection and the total energy budget after injection for both samples of GRBs is comparable. More intriguing, we find that a prior X-ray emission model proposed by Yamazaki is more straightforward to interpret the data. We show that the zero times (T0) of the X-rays atisfy a log-normal distribution, and the negligible T0's of the SPL sample are consistent with being the tail of T0 distributions at low end. Referenced to T0, the canonical XRT lightcurves well trace the SPL lightcurves. The T0's of the canonical lightcurves in our analysis are usually much larger than the offsets of the known precursors from the main GRBs, indicating the X-rays would be an emission component from external shocks prior to GRB trigger. The lack of detection of a jet-like break in most XRT lightcurves implies that the opening angle of its jet would be usually large.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.